Alexander Bortnikov is simply being fired. It is obvious that Putin's order is impossible to carry out and I'm sure he doesn't care that everyone knows it.
Sorry, but you're wrong about my intent. I never said that everything must be patented or that there is no place for sharing and open science. I simply say that there is a place for patent protection and that it's current limit of 20 years is a fair balance between the rights of inventors and those of the public.
Usually, especially when money is involved, patents fit the public need by making it possible to start a business, or entire industry, and making it only a 20-year headstart gives others the opportunity to take such progress as far as it can go.
You can credit patents with making car manufacturers big enough to innovate as rapidly as they have been and the shortness of the same patents to make cars affordable today, even though they are technically far superior than the Model T.
You, if you'll remember correctly, started from the position that 20 years is unfair by ignoring one side of that balance. If anyone ignores either side of that balance they are being unfair to somebody's rights. If a government does the same, innovation is held back one way or the other.
That doesn't stop plaintiffs from suing you into the poorhouse because they often don't have to reimburse you for your costs unless you have hired the most costly of lawyers to represent you on contingency.
And yet if that plan was put into effect no patents would be filed, as that would give away the inventors' only incentive. Thus all technologies would become trade secrets and everyone who copied anyone else [intentionally or not] would be dragged into court to spend fortunes just to make the problem go away.
Trade secrets, in case you didn't know, don't expire, delaying follow-on innovation until their owners say so; which means a lot longer than their lifetimes.
Recipes for Coca-Cola and KFC are like that. If you happen to copy them, even by accident, say goodbye to your life savings and any hope of a career as an inventor.
An idyllic society of sharing is a nice theory but invention is a matter of business. It has to be temporarily protected in order to create a profit and an incentive to innovate in the first place.
It illustrates that the limited time of patents give inventors a couple of decades to profit from their work, a reasonable encouragement, then gives the public permission to benefit from that same work whether or not the inventor got rich before then.
If the period was shorter there's less incentive to innovate and if longer, that innovation would be denied to others for longer.
Don't forget the patents are a publishing of inventions, sort of a heads-up to the public that they can try the new technology for themselves after expiry. If not for that mandated publicity those inventions would be kept secret and most inventions would be forgotten, lost forever.
You're stuck in a hypothetical question; thus stuck in a box.
If such a situation occurred in real life, my evasion is obvious enough that many people would reach it quickly enough to save everyone and render the "question" moot.
Most people start with the instinct "stop that trolley", even if it is not presented as an option, and finding the obvious solution [the switch] literally at hand, set it and run.
That's why hypothetical games don't apply well to reality. When lives are at stake, nobody thinks about the "purpose" of choices in front of them. They do or do not. ;]
This is why "ethical programming" for a self-driving car can only fail. While manufacturers could code various scenarios they cannot come up with the instincts necessary to counter impossible problems with impossible solutions that may work.
The most ethical, practical approach for them is to focus on occupant safety and leave the Kobayashi Marus to the drivers; even though those drivers may often fail, because sometimes they will succeed in ways that can't be forseen or programmed.
Besides, keeping the programming simple and robust is insurable. I'm sure most insurers have already reached the same conclusion.
Any rail switch can be left between it's two positions and then abandoned, guaranteeing a derailment and giving me enough time to get clear and far away enough to avoid arrest for damaging replaceable steel instead of making someone die to protect a corporation's profit margin.
I protect all "victims" over mere property and myself from those few who prefer that somebody, anybody, die to keep the trains running on time and profitable. ;]
It is more likely we have mostly younger ones because that distant oxygen, which existed 13.1 billion years ago, has had 13.1 billion years of newer oxygen produced to join it.
We have some of the old stuff but mostly the newer oxygen.
On the post: Wireless Industry To Request En Banc Appeal Hearing On Net Neutrality Rules
Oh, I'm sure at least one of his staff is reading this site.
On the post: Ted Cruz Campaign Infringed On Copyright, But Will Probably Be Treated With Kid Gloves Just Because
spellchecking before hitting the Submit button.
;]
On the post: Ted Cruz Campaign Infringed On Copyright, But Will Probably Be Treated With Kid Gloves Just Because
Tim? Spellcheck:
;]
On the post: Cy Vance Still Arguing For Mandated Encryption Backdoors; Believes Third Party Doctrine Supports His Theory
"We can't bend down far enough, so HOP HIGHER!"
On the post: Facebook Sued Again For 'Material Support' Of Terrorism, Because Hamas Uses Facebook
The press attempted public shaming for that…
and customers didn't tell Toyota that they were terrorists. ;]
On the post: European Telcos Threaten To Withhold Next Gen Wireless Upgrades If Net Neutrality Rules Passed
Technically, North Korean missile tests don't crash and burn.
On the post: Putin Says All Encryption Must Be Backdoored In Two Weeks
This is obviously not an attack on encryption.
that Putin's order is impossible to carry out and I'm sure
he doesn't care that everyone knows it.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 26th - July 1st
everything must be patented or that there is no place
for sharing and open science. I simply say that there is a
place for patent protection and that it's current limit of
20 years is a fair balance between the rights of inventors
and those of the public.
Usually, especially when money is involved, patents fit the
public need by making it possible to start a business, or
entire industry, and making it only a 20-year headstart gives
others the opportunity to take such progress as far as it can go.
You can credit patents with making car manufacturers big
enough to innovate as rapidly as they have been and the
shortness of the same patents to make cars affordable today,
even though they are technically far superior than the Model T.
You, if you'll remember correctly, started from the position
that 20 years is unfair by ignoring one side of that balance.
If anyone ignores either side of that balance they are being
unfair to somebody's rights. If a government does the same,
innovation is held back one way or the other.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 26th - July 1st
because they often don't have to reimburse you for your costs
unless you have hired the most costly of lawyers to represent
you on contingency.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 26th - July 1st
be filed, as that would give away the inventors' only incentive.
Thus all technologies would become trade secrets and everyone
who copied anyone else [intentionally or not] would be dragged
into court to spend fortunes just to make the problem go away.
Trade secrets, in case you didn't know, don't expire,
delaying follow-on innovation until their owners say so;
which means a lot longer than their lifetimes.
Recipes for Coca-Cola and KFC are like that. If you happen
to copy them, even by accident, say goodbye to your life
savings and any hope of a career as an inventor.
An idyllic society of sharing is a nice theory but invention
is a matter of business. It has to be temporarily protected
in order to create a profit and an incentive to innovate in
the first place.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: June 26th - July 1st
Not exactly.
a couple of decades to profit from their work, a reasonable
encouragement, then gives the public permission to benefit
from that same work whether or not the inventor got rich
before then.
If the period was shorter there's less incentive to innovate
and if longer, that innovation would be denied to others
for longer.
Don't forget the patents are a publishing of inventions,
sort of a heads-up to the public that they can try the new
technology for themselves after expiry. If not for that
mandated publicity those inventions would be kept secret
and most inventions would be forgotten, lost forever.
On the post: People Support Ethical Automated Cars That Prioritize The Lives Of Others -- Unless They're Riding In One
manufacturers don't even try to think about it.
On the post: People Support Ethical Automated Cars That Prioritize The Lives Of Others -- Unless They're Riding In One
There's your problem:
If such a situation occurred in real life, my evasion is
obvious enough that many people would reach it quickly
enough to save everyone and render the "question" moot.
Most people start with the instinct "stop that trolley",
even if it is not presented as an option, and finding the
obvious solution [the switch] literally at hand, set it and run.
That's why hypothetical games don't apply well to reality.
When lives are at stake, nobody thinks about the "purpose"
of choices in front of them. They do or do not. ;]
This is why "ethical programming" for a self-driving car can
only fail. While manufacturers could code various scenarios
they cannot come up with the instincts necessary to counter
impossible problems with impossible solutions that may work.
The most ethical, practical approach for them is to focus on
occupant safety and leave the Kobayashi Marus to the drivers;
even though those drivers may often fail, because sometimes
they will succeed in ways that can't be forseen or programmed.
Besides, keeping the programming simple and robust is insurable.
I'm sure most insurers have already reached the same conclusion.
On the post: People Support Ethical Automated Cars That Prioritize The Lives Of Others -- Unless They're Riding In One
The first time I saw that "trolley problem"…
Any rail switch can be left between it's two positions and
then abandoned, guaranteeing a derailment and giving me
enough time to get clear and far away enough to avoid
arrest for damaging replaceable steel instead of making
someone die to protect a corporation's profit margin.
I protect all "victims" over mere property and myself
from those few who prefer that somebody, anybody, die to
keep the trains running on time and profitable. ;]
On the post: Airbnb Goes To Court To Stop San Francisco's New Anti-Airbnb Law
Don't forget the property taxes.
they get more tax money without hiking tax [u]rates[/u].
On the post: Daily Deal: The Complete Machine Learning Bundle
Not much difference…
singlehandedly eliminated Machine Autism and possibly prevented
Skynet's Judgement Day. ;]
On the post: DailyDirt: Solving Mysteries Of The Universe...
distant oxygen, which existed 13.1 billion years ago, has
had 13.1 billion years of newer oxygen produced to join it.
We have some of the old stuff but mostly the newer oxygen.
On the post: Disappointing: Twitch Brings CFAA & Trademark Claim Against Bot Operators
On the post: Tim Wu Joins NY AG's Office In Shaming 'Abysmal' Cable Broadband ISPs
which tends to get results; being hard to ignore. ;]
On the post: DailyDirt: Classic Cars 2.0
Re: Re: toasted a Ferrari 308
Next >>